Yuan Xinwei, Zhang Bin, Hu Jiang, Lu Bing, Tang Zhi
Department of Orthopedics, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences, Chengdu Sichuan, 610072, P.R.China.
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2021 Jun 15;35(6):729-733. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202101029.
To compare the effectiveness of robot assisted internal fixation and traditional open reduction and internal fixation for calcaneal fractures.
The clinical data of 44 patients (44 feets) with calcaneal fracture admitted between October 2017 and December 2018 who met the selection criteria were retrospectively analyzed. According to different operation methods, they were divided into trial group (19 cases, treated with robot assisted percutaneous reduction and cannulated screw fixation through tarsal sinus incision) and control group (25 cases, treated with open reduction and internal fixation via traditional tarsal sinus incision). There was no significant difference in gender, age, injured side, cause of injury, fracture type, time from injury to operation, and preoperative Böhler angle, Gissane angle, calcaneus width, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Association (AOFAS) score, and other general data between the two groups ( >0.05). The operation time, intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency, and fracture healing time were recorded and compared between the two groups. Before operation and at 6 months after operation, the Böhler angle and Gissane angle were measured on the lateral X-ray film, and the calcaneal width was measured on the axial X-ray film of the calcaneus to evaluate the recovery of the deformity and collapse after surgical treatment; the AOFAS score was used to evaluate the function of the affected foot and ankle joint.
The operation time of the trial group was significantly longer than that of the control group ( <0.05), but the intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency was significantly less than that of the control group ( <0.05). In the control group, 1 case had skin necrosis, and 1 case had a little leakage from the incision; the rest of the two groups had no skin- and incision-related complications. Patients in both groups were followed up 6-12 months, with an average of 9.5 months. At 6 months after operation, the Böhler angle, Gissane angle, and calcaneal width in the two groups were significantly improved when compared with preoperative ones ( <0.05), and there was no significant difference between the two groups ( >0.05); the fractures in the two groups were healed, there was no significant difference in healing time ( =-1.890, =0.066); the AOFAS scores of the two groups were significantly higher than those before operation ( <0.05), and the AOFAS score of the trial group was significantly higher than that of the control group ( =-3.135, =0.003).
Compared with traditional C-arm fluoroscopic internal fixation for calcaneal fractures, robot-assisted internal fixation via tarsal sinus incision for calcaneal fractures significantly improves the function of the affected foot and maintains the accuracy of nail implantation after fracture reduction, reducing intraoperative fluoroscopy times, and the fracture heals well.
比较机器人辅助内固定与传统切开复位内固定治疗跟骨骨折的疗效。
回顾性分析2017年10月至2018年12月收治的44例(44足)符合入选标准的跟骨骨折患者的临床资料。根据手术方式不同,分为试验组(19例,采用机器人辅助经跗骨窦切口经皮复位空心螺钉内固定)和对照组(25例,采用传统跗骨窦切口切开复位内固定)。两组患者在性别、年龄、伤侧、受伤原因、骨折类型、受伤至手术时间、术前Böhler角、Gissane角、跟骨宽度、美国足踝外科协会(AOFAS)评分等一般资料方面比较,差异均无统计学意义(>0.05)。记录并比较两组患者的手术时间、术中透视次数及骨折愈合时间。术前及术后6个月,在跟骨侧位X线片上测量Böhler角和Gissane角,在跟骨轴位X线片上测量跟骨宽度,以评估手术治疗后畸形和塌陷的恢复情况;采用AOFAS评分评估患足踝关节功能。
试验组手术时间显著长于对照组(<0.05),但术中透视次数显著少于对照组(<0.05)。对照组1例发生皮肤坏死,1例切口有少许渗液;其余两组均无皮肤及切口相关并发症。两组患者均随访6~12个月,平均9.5个月。术后6个月,两组患者的Böhler角、Gissane角及跟骨宽度与术前比较均显著改善(<0.05),两组间比较差异无统计学意义(>0.05);两组骨折均愈合,愈合时间比较差异无统计学意义(=-1.890,=0.066);两组AOFAS评分均显著高于术前(<0.05),且试验组AOFAS评分显著高于对照组(=-3.135,=0.003)。
与传统C型臂透视下跟骨骨折内固定相比,机器人辅助经跗骨窦切口跟骨骨折内固定能显著改善患足功能,维持骨折复位后螺钉植入的准确性,减少术中透视次数,骨折愈合良好。